All that seems to matter to most consumers is if the end product is entertaining, inciteful or has artistic merit. No one owes an artist a career, a job or validation. If someone can use various tools (automation et al) to get it done faster while being more lucrative - sounds like a win.

We're currently in that 'rock-n-roll' is the devil's music period with AI. It will pass. Eventually, AI will be the new normalcy bias - how did we ever get by without robots?

I saw recently a guy who used AI art programs to make a graphic novel of a fairy tale from his home country about a particular castle that is there.

It came out really well. He had to mess around a bit just to get the characters to stay consistent and so on but he managed to create a pretty-good short-story length graphic novel way faster and cheaper than hiring an illustrator.

Anyone who has ever had anything illustrated understands how slow it is, how time-consuming.

This graphic novel was really the first time I ever saw it as an absolutely viable thing that will be coming.

Before long, graphic novels will be like audiobooks - just another format for authors to put their work into. The programs to make them will just get better and better until it can store characters and keep them consistent, store locations.

There will be a time where it's six programs patched together to make one of these things and then eventually we'll get to Vellum levels of simplicity - just import your manuscript and watch it spit out a full graphic novel.

I really can't wait. It's going to be amazing. A real explosion of beautiful cool things and super low cost so it's very accessible.

I think AI is cheating a bit when it comes to writing, but that's because I'm a writer. If I were a narrator or artist, then I'd probably feel the same way about those uses. 

However, PJ is right. The public probably doesn't care.  I see it all the time in fundraising campaigns.  AI art seems to get more attention than the other campaigns.  And it less expensive to use it. 

At the end of the day, it comes down to the individual and what they are comfortable using/buying.

ETA: I'm not sure AI could come up with what I'm writing into this latest fairytale.  And if it did, they'd probably think it was a glitch. LOL

All that seems to matter to most consumers is if the end product is entertaining, inciteful or has artistic merit. No one owes an artist a career, a job or validation. If someone can use various tools (automation et al) to get it done faster while being more lucrative - sounds like a win.

We're currently in that 'rock-n-roll' is the devil's music period with AI. It will pass. Eventually, AI will be the new normalcy bias - how did we ever get by without robots?

Quote from: Gregg Bell on September 07, 2024, 09:51:37 AM

Quote from: The Bass Bagwhan on September 02, 2024, 12:44:28 PM

I've researched but found nothing recent ... AMS ads do take a while before you can properly assess whether they're working, correct? I don't mean Amazon approval, I mean looking at the results and deciding if you got it right.

Cheers for any help.

I've heard think long term. And don't think expense. Think investment.

The word you're looking for is gambling. 

Ha ha. Pretty much. The odds are definitely stacked in favor of the house.

I don't think we're necessarily arguing over semantics. All I'm saying is that Boucher is having problems because people believed AI was doing the writing for him. His response was that the ideas were his, and he was just using AI to facilitate. He probably could have responded in other ways as well. But my comment was shaped by what his response actually was, not by my own perception of the nature of ideas. I agree with you that ideas can come from a lot of places. But certainly one way to defend against critics who claim the books were just AI productions would be to say that the ideas came from the author, not from AI.